The FDA’s Mitch Zeller & Dr. Scott Gottlieb have been published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
“A Nicotine-Focused Framework for Public Health”
While claiming nicotine is the center of “addiction” and the reduction of nicotine as the answer to reduce tobacco use… their seemingly contrived objective is in part below:
“The agency’s new tobacco strategy has two primary parts: reducing the addictiveness of combustible cigarettes while recognizing and clarifying the role that potentially less harmful tobacco products could play in improving public health. We must also work toward a greater role for medicinal nicotine and other therapeutic products in helping smokers to quit and remain nonsmokers.”
While I am completely opposed to the framing of the nicotine addiction theory without tobacco, there were two other parts I’m not convinced quite yet that we’re on the right path; bold is my emphasis:
“reducing the addictiveness of combustible cigarettes”
“We must also work toward a greater role for medicinal nicotine and other therapeutic products in helping smokers to quit and remain nonsmokers.”
The focus on “nicotine” is, in my eyes, a subliminal way to keep the definition of e-liquid as tobacco, manipulate e-cigarette products as tobacco, and collect unjust & undue tax – on a product that is not addictive without tobacco, and not tobacco.
The teetering on medicinal nicotine & other therapeutic products gives a direct odor of pharmaceutical product and control, something they’ve already had and failed miserably with.
Nicotine, though not benign, is not directly responsible for the tobacco-caused cancer, lung disease, and heart disease that kill hundreds of thousands of Americans each year.
Excellent….and goes on to add
…within a landscape including other, noncombustible products such as e-cigarettes, represents a promising foundation for a comprehensive approach to tobacco harm reduction. In working toward this vision, the FDA is committed to striking an appropriate balance between protecting the public and fostering innovation in less harmful nicotine delivery.
That’s the first positive thing I’ve heard in some time from the government:
Tobacco Harm Reduction.
Are there other chemicals that cause addiction in tobacco?
MAIO’s?
I didn’t quit smoking. I didn’t stop smoking. I switched to a less harmful alternative. I chose to try a “cig-a-like” and I didn’t want a cigarette within 48 hours, and my wife chose to do the same thing.
My journey was no different than most others who accidentally found an alternative to smoking that actually worked with no withdrawal and no noticeable side effects.
After more than four years, I’ve found myself in a cesspool of adults – specifically professionals with titles and “I love me” walls – who pretend to have no common sense.
I take that back, there are side effects to not smoking with my chosen path.
Reading. LOTS of reading.
Research. Finding answers myself.
Asking questions and “networking”. I have found that if I don’t know or understand, someone will, without fail, answer my question both truthfully and in a way I will understand.
Blogging. To get what I do learn & understand out to others who hopefully will find it – and understand it.
Twitter. Immense knowledge and reference from worldwide advocates.
Questioning.
I am constantly questioning everything I thought I knew I was told about smoking.
Tobacco Harm Reduction.
Health and government organizations don’t subscribe to tobacco harm reduction. With them, you will find cessation.
According to Merriam-Webster, “cessation” is to stop.
: a temporary or final ceasing (as of action) : stop mutually agreed to a cessation of fighting
What “organizations” and government are doing is promoting a highly profitable and repeatablebusiness.
The vulnerability of someone with great expectations isn’t considered, it is mocked.
They wrongfully blame the consumer. They blatantly blame “nicotine“.
What they “give away” are products made by pharmaceutical companies and an air of authority, combined with an illusion of an answer to help someone stop smoking.
The reality of these methods and the failure rates is dismal and never discussed.
Entertain yourself.
Call a quitline and ask them about the success rates with the patch or gum.
Success?
Well, I’ll let the display of an “expert” organization speak for themselves below:
For the record, I am not against the patch, gum, lozenge, hypnosis, a self-help book, accupuncture, heat not burn, snus, smokeless tobacco, e-cigarettes, and other alternatives.
Only if used with extreme cautionand understanding the well documented side effects, medication is also avaible to help someone choose to stop smoking.
I am, however against giving improper or bias information to those who don’t know any better and rely on “trusted” organizations, public health & government officials.
I will do this until I can’t type, call, scream, tweet or blog any longer.
Think of the possibilities.
I am a consumer. I have no ulterior motive.
I take that back, I have ulterior motive. The choice of smoker, the non-smoker and education of the consumer.
I have proudly joined the Board of Directors of THR4Life (Tobacco Harm Reduction 4 Life) along with 5 others:
Kevin Price, Lindsay Stroud, Skip Murray, Jenny Ho and David Goerlitz.
This group of individuals are strong, opinionated, intelligent and, without question, looking out for the consumer.
Tobacco Harm Reduction 4 Life is are a Public Charity 501c3 and we are Tax-Deductible for bequests, devises, transfers or gifts under Section 2055, 2106, or 2522 of the IRS.
To reduce the risks of smoking, physicians need proper information to rely on and relay to their patients. E-cigarettes are another way to reduce or eliminate smoking.
The worldwide claim of professionals “not knowing” the risks of e-cigarettes has come to a close.
There’s no reason for physicians to dismiss e-cigarettes or less harm to patients.
Of 560 physicians surveyed, over 70% “indicated that e-cigs can help patients reduce or eliminate smoking” and “almost half believe they can reduce risk”:
Dr. Cranfield explains the health effects of users over three years.
Users showed a 96% reduction in adverse health problems by users of three or more years. Conditions such as heart disease, high blood pressure and asthma improved by 61.8%
Conditions such as heart disease, high blood pressure and asthma improved by 61.8% of those diagnosed with those health issues while they smoked.
Vaping In The News – April 16th – April 22nd, 2017
Hunter Vaping Legislation Ready To Replace Deeming Regs ~ Worldwide Survey ~ A Billion Lives ~ Clive Bates ~ Discrimination ~ Regulations ~ Mayor of TobaccoVille ~ New Surgeon General ~ Battery Safety (NFPA) ~ 625 MILLION Dollars ~ Negative Effects ~ Less Harmful ~ No Proof of Nicotine Addiction
Via Brent Stafford & Regulator Watch
Brent Stafford and Regulator Watch have been pressing many issues in the e-cigarette world and keeping us informed.
Related:
The FDA Deeming Clarification Act of 2017 (HR 1136) was introduced on Thursday, February 16th. Republican Tom Cole of Oklahoma (4th district) and Democrat Sanford Bishop of Georgia (2nd district) have built on previous legislative attempts from 2015 and 2016. HR 1136 is an updated version of HR 2058 and the Cole/Bishop amendment.
Since e-cigarettes and nicotine were deemed a tobacco product on National Tobacco Day, you can be fired, or “not hired” due to tobacco use.
In some cases, adult tobacco users have even been fired from their jobs just because they use tobacco products during their free time, and that’s not right….
…in some workplaces, if you smoke or dip, you won’t get hired.
Nicotine addiction MUST to be at the top five lies in public health, tobacco control and is, in my consumer-driven view, the largest lie in smoking “cessation”.
I’ve tweeted and posted this challenge to facebook to many useful idiots. Many of you have shared it, and thank you. (I’m still on a mission.)
NOT one public health expert has proven addiction to nicotine in my challenge.
Originally set at 30 days, I have not let it expire. I think they need more time.
*Think of the implications of the claim, and the multi-million dollar industry who is unable to prove me wrong.
New Zealand ~ Neal Asher On Vaping ~ E-cigarette-Research Fundraiser ~ The Thunder from Down Under ~ Cigar Industry Lawsuit Against FDA Delayed ~ New Nicotine Alliance ~ Harm Reduction Drives Younger Vapers, Not Flavors ~ As the vaper revolution gathers steam, American smokers are being left behind ~ Two Studies ~ A Poll ~
You MUST get louder.
There are millions of people who have chosen to switch to e-cigarettes. If you’re reading this, you are the minority of those who are involved.
The time for rolling over and accepting the regulations, restrictions, taxes, and bans they come up with is unacceptable.
From my friends at Vapers.org.uk
While tobacco and other nicotine products were still legal, legalizing nicotine for e-cigarettes in New Zealand is now underway.
We’re demanding professionals answer questions – making snowflakes melt…and they’re not used to that.
…and also instinctively want to seize control of and legislate for anything new. But it is some in the medical profession for whom I have the greatest contempt. They’ve had careers telling people to ‘quit or die’ and now cannot quite comprehend this level of harm reduction.
You might thinkthis is an April Fool’s joke – but it isn’t. David Sweanor was not allowed to speak due to lack of openings, which prompted this ThunderClap on twitter.
In Canada, there is a possible $500,000 fine and two years jail time. For telling the truth about e-cigarettes.
It is time for those in power to change the laws, to see they’ve been lied to (and still are) by ANTZ (Anti-Nicotine & Tobacco Zealots) long enough. It is time to stop rewarding the lies and accept that smokers are switching in droves for a reason.
NNA has come a very long way in two short years and we have thoroughly earned our reputation as a “go to” organisation on tobacco harm reduction. Now we need your help to achieve even more. We have never asked for money before but we need to now.
THE only regulation points they have are the never-ending fictitious “Think of the Children™” claim – which goes hand in hand with the even more fictitious nicotine “addiction” claim.
Ecigs are not the only thing under the rules imposed by the FDA.
The hearing on the joint lawsuit filed by the International Premium Cigar & Pipe Retailers (IPCPR), Cigar Rights of America (CRA) and Cigar Association of America (CAA) has been delayed.
The United States is a world leader in innovation. But when it comes to ensuring smokers have the maximum possible access to new devices and products that will help them quit and save their lives the U.S. is found tragically wanting.
Vaping In The News – February 26th-March 4th, 2017
CASAA, Blog Fog, American Vaping Association, Regulatory Pie, Simon Chapman, Dick Durbin, Public Policy, Indiana, Bill Godshall
Advocacy
I first met Jennifer Berger-Coleman online when I saw her post this:
I asked her permission to use that graphic and did so here. (Thank you again, Jennifer!)
I was delighted to see this:
CASAA is pleased to announce some welcome additions to our leadership team.
Jennifer Berger-Coleman was elected to CASAA’s Board of Directors. While new to the Board, Jennifer is certainly not new to advocacy. In addition to working on tobacco harm reduction advocacy in California, Jennifer has a long history of advocacy involving civil rights and health care issues. Her skills as an outreach coordinator will be employed to help CASAA reach populations and communities where smoking rates remain disproportionately high.
It seems the fog still hangs over the Tobacco Control BMJ and its authors of “Blog Fog” after more than ten days.
In their feeble attempt to assert themselves of promoting open and rapid debate to the little people (in the name of advancing science, of course), technical difficulties, password issues and a comedy of errors have one author now “mortified“ due to different but linked systems. Uh huh.
The FDA is holding a $1,000,000 pie eating contest.
“to conduct an in-depth evaluation of available evidence of health effects from e-cigarettes and recommendations for future federally funded research.”
Speaking of idiots, Simon Chapman thinks, and that should be regulated.
(Bold is my emphasis)
“We expect those who know most about health problems to have views about what should be done to solve them and the courage to put these forward, even if they imply criticism of governments or powerful interest groups.”
“Trump’s recent gagging of all government environmental agency staff is surely the start of a process that will spread to government funded universities in the USA.”
Simon Chapman thinks researchers have a “duty” to try and influence policy.
In other news …..
Senator Durbin is still babbling incessantly, insisting “we need strong regulations of e-cigarettes.”
“In a nearly unanimous vote yesterday, the Indiana Senate overwhelming approved legislation that will finally attempt to reform the state’s controversial vaping laws. Passing with a 49-1 margin, the bill now heads to the House, although it is unclear if Senate Bill 1 will be altered in any way to gain a House majority vote.”
Imagine a business with no worries about profit or loss – and the money keeps coming in. As a bonus, you can carry this on for more than 50 years and brag about it.
With more than 560 physicians surveyed, over 70% “indicated that e-cigs can help patients reduce or eliminate smoking” and “almost half believe they can reduce risk” according to a new survey by Andrew Nickels, M.D. called “Majority of US doctors discussing electronic cigarettes with their patients”.
Patients in the United States have been inundated withbias information and opinions by health officials with false or manipulated data. Physicians MUST take an active role to understand the difference between combustible tobacco and e-cigs to advise their patients correctly.
This is not the first survey to ask professionals what they thought about vaping products. Participation was significantly lower in a survey I conducted with 84 professionals – but the consensus was very similar.
85% said they are safer than combustible cigarettes.
77% will tell patients an e-cigarette is an option.
Organizations that are representing themselves as “stop smoking” services all say the same thing. “Keep trying“.
Physicians are well aware of failure rates as high as 93% with nicotine patch and gums, and multiple risks are involved for patients with prescriptions like the once “black-boxed” (now irresponsibly removed) Chantix and other medications.
Now it seems they are listening to successes of some patients and passing on the knowledge they gain, “anecdotal” or not, to others.
Success isn’t hard to find
Success is glaringly obvious in surveys of vapers where “79% had completely quit smoking cigarettes” (here) and 42% stopped in one day – 75% stopped within a month here.
What about addiction to nicotine?
All health organizationsfalsely portray “nicotine” as “addictive”, a worn out and common “misdiagnosis” from folks who should know better, and is rarely questioned.
Pharmaceutical companies certainly are an ambitious lot – they created the “nicotine is addictive” myth out of thin air along with anti-smoking zealots to sell products. Stanton Glantz supports the pharmaceutical companies and makes things up as he goes along, and gets paid to do so.
Without tobacco and the accompanying MAOI’s and ingredients added to cigarettes, nicotine itself is not addictive, in humans, without it.
Public health organizations and government sing the same song:
The global public health establishment now dances to the tunes the pharmaceuticals play:
Increase tobacco taxes to make the price of the pharmaceutical products more competitive with tobacco products.
Demonize the tobacco industry and prohibit the advertising of their products.
Enact smoking bans to force smokers either to attempt to give up smoking using the pharmaceuticals’ products or to use “nicotine replacement” products as substitutes for when they cannot smoke.
Promote smoking cessation and “treatment” for nicotine addiction.
Promote full coverage for treatment of nicotine addiction by public and private health insurers.
All these strategies are guaranteed to increase the pharmaceuticals’ profits.
At this point, professionals in the U.S. who claim they “do not know enough” or don’t know the “long term effects” are unacceptable and unprofessional.
Dr. Cranfield explains the health effects of users over three years.
Users showed a 96% reduction in adverse health problems by users of three or more years. Conditions such as heart disease, high blood pressure and asthma improved by 61.8%
Conditions such as heart disease, high blood pressure and asthma improved by 61.8% of those diagnosed with those health issues while they smoked.
What are implications to withholding information from those who need it?
There’s no reasonto ignore e-cigarettes, or less harm, to patients (or the public). When science and facts are ignored, people will still take advice to use the patch, gum and other “traditional” methods. When those methods fail, they will still use combustible tobacco. They will continue to smoke – because facts about e-cigarettes were ignored.
is what is on a street from the Leicester Stop Smoking Service in Leicester, England.
Leicester Stop Smoking Service:
• Ecigs don’t contain the tar and carbon monoxide that lit cigarettes do, and are therefore much safer than smoking
• There is no evidence that ecigs are encouraging people to go back to smoking, in fact the opposite is true; seeing people use ecigs seems to encourage others to consider switching to a safer alternative
M.O.V.E. is “Medical Organizations supporting Vaping and Electronic cigarettes”.
Medical Professionals Support Vaping And Electronic Cigarettes:
Denial of scientific evidence is unethical, wrong for public health.
The organization states:
“the use of electronic cigarettes clearly has huge potential to help many smokers turn their backs on tobacco.”
Focusing their attention squarely on e-cigarettes, they have a simple position on other cessation methods, stating “Unfortunately, currently available smoking cessation medications have limited efficacy and acceptability for the majority of smokers”.
It is the combustion of tobacco and the 4000 chemical substances that are produced when smoking cigarettes that are harmful to health of smokers, not the nicotine.
The dangers of electronic cigarettes are considerably lower than those of tobacco. From analysis of the constituents of e-cigarette vapour, e-cigarettes can be expected to be at least 95 to 99% safer than smoking tobacco cigarettes in terms of long-term health risks.
If you are in the medical, research or scientific fields…Doctors, Nurses, E.M.T.’s Physicians Assistants, Researchers, Dentists, Psychologists and more are members.
If you are a professional and have questions, message me here. I can get you in touch with these professionals online. I’ll get you where you need to go.
You are welcome to join M.O.V.E. and show your support here:
The potential to reduce combustible tobacco with the use of e-cigs is being fought for, and against, and is here to stay.
The public must have the opportunity to choose a less harmful product with much lower risk and obvious benefit and hear professional views derived from research and science. They are confronting their doctors. They are trying to gain insight from who they trust.
While attitudes abroad look at research and less risk, health “organizations” in the U.S.A. are still insisting they don’t know enough. This has to stop.
You can go to these resources to expand your knowledge about e-cigarettes.
Have you noticed a shift in in reporting in the United States about e-cigs? Have they completely lost their minds? No… If you start to notice it, there’s a reason. On August 8th, 2016, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) deemed nicotine as tobacco – and took the reign over ecigs.
It’s mind-boggling how nicotine and such things as batteries being defined as tobacco products can make an expert think.
The public has suffered an onslaught of headlines, #fakenews and click-bait touting “A million more times harmful” and “formaldehyde”. A chorus of experts have sung everyone’s classic “Think Of The Children™ in tune to garner support.
This change in the weather has taken a LOT of work. Health groups have been working in tandem to demonize e-cigs without fail to create the controversy, to control public opinion, to keep resistance to a bare minimum. Now it’s suppertime.
Not so long ago, e-cigs were bad. There are astounding examples and a great blog by Robert Innes about that here:
Now, since the FDA has defined nicotine as a “tobacco product”, a paradigm shift has occurred. There must be one big-ass mass email of “ok folks, let’s roll the other way now” put out by tobacco control.
Not all, but some organizations are posting “less hateful” news. I predict more.
The bell has rung. They don’t care about safety, children, chemicals or your “journey” to stop smoking. Now they’re motivated. There is official drooling and control.
Please, smoke ’em if you got ’em- and now taxes of your vaping products will be sufficient.
The association with “safer” in the health world is the addiction trigger to all who, directly or indirectly operate with or, are funded by, tobacco tax – as e-cigs become surprisingly more acceptable.
“When it’s over I predict that each camp will claim plausible deniability to the fact that it takes someone from smoking, keeps them from smoking, and keeps all involved from revenue unless it is deemed & taxed like a tobacco product.”
Fear is a lack of knowledge. Knowledge is power. To find valuable information – credible information – about vaping and e-cigarettes isn’t difficult. You have to know where to look, understand information as it is presented to you, and use it to make decisions for yourself.
To begin your journey, to expand your knowledge, you have places to go.
There are hundreds, if not thousands of personal blogs covering vaping in the research, legislative, political, scientific, and personal arena of e-cigarettes.
Sharing information about e-cigarettes is essential, and for some, a passion to educate others with accurate and forthright information.
One individual (listed) schooled me quickly and privately about nicotine. I was drinking the kool-aid up to that moment and he opened my eyes to the vast and valuable opportunity of learning.
Another individual listed fired me up so much to fight, I started my own blog.
You don’t always have to agree with individuals in “every” instance, but be open minded, take their vantage point and learn.
How we gain continuous knowledge about e-cigarettes, and what we need to learn via perspective from which it comes, holds weight. Not restrained with “deadlines”, angles or sponsors where there may be bias, individual consumers themselves have skill, direct impact and ability to communicate what needs to be said with vigor and style all their own.
Despite the vast claims “experts” manufacture, we, as individuals, are the experts.
This is an example of a journalist withholdingknowledge and information – from Sarah Knapton – Telegraph’s Science Editor.
It is yet another example of what we’re fighting against as individuals.
Who at @Telegraph can explain if this is their official position on news regarding smokers & vapers? Who does 'we' refer to? pic.twitter.com/zs73slZwU7
These few, for different reasons, have their admirable style and grace. You can find humor, be outraged and find a gold mine of truthful information. Consumers all over the world are looking for the bad about e-cigarettes – just as hard as the good – and tell it like it is.
You can be engrossed in the veracity and tenacity of their views and learn.
As an example of what is out there, there are many more doing things behind the scenes.
Everyone has a role in fighting – no matter what medium they use. The list of individuals and sites above is certainly not everyone. There are individuals writing and calling politicians, going to meetings. Starting websites. Educating their Doctors. Tweeting. Giving testimonies in court. With every breath you take, find that role.
You can find me here trying to be cordial on Facebook
You can find me here being a bit more evil on Twitter
Speaking of wizardry, it’s disheartening to see the public health sector including TV doctors like Dr. Oz and Dr. Jennifer Caudle denying anything but their own interests and touting “approved methods” by claiming they “don’t know enough”. Oh wait, they’re experts.
E-cigarettes have been around more than ten years. Research has been coming for quite some time. Surely the crack staff of the great and powerful Oz could have found some if they’d only followed the yellow brick road. I already know Dr. Oz’s credibility doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.
So, according to her website Dr. Caudle (“Dorothy”) “graduated with Honors from Princeton University and earned her medical degree from UMDNJ – School of Osteopathic Medicine.” and claims “she is a regular on-air health expert for local and national news networks.”
In her expert article “What You Need to Know About E-Cigarettes“, she states she’s “concerned about the potential harm of e-cigarettes.” She also states “there is a lot that we know and a lot we don’t know.’’
If you were paying attention, you would see what Doctors in Journal Of The American Board Of Family Medicine said about Physician Advice for e-Cigarette Use.
I’m not letting you get away with it. You forgot the consumer within the ‘need’ part. You failed to mention a thing about ecigarette-research.orgor CASAA. Maybe you didn’t know about them at the time of your latest article?
We’re not idiots. We’re already looking for all we can know about e-cigarettes. Do you know why? We’re tired of everyone being lied to. Because we’re the stakeholder in the equation. You’re not.
You’re worried about ratings and what your peers think. I’m concerned with the efficacy and safety of the device. Had you contacted CASAA they would have sent you here for battery safety.
I don’t understand it all, but others – including colleagues of yours, doctors, scientists and more, do. They explain it to folks like me. You explain little, because you don’t know enough.
It doesn’t seem to do a lot for consumer – or patient confidence in your skills as a Doctor. Further your education before claiming expertise. Watch out for those flying monkeys and get those ruby slippers, Dorothy.
For those “challenged” in public health, there’s no place like home.
